Secret UK Network Hunts GPS Jammers

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Secret UK Network Hunts GPS Jammers

Posted by samzenpus on Wednesday February 22, 2012 @08:07PM from the hunt-you-down dept.

garymortimer writes "A secret network of 20 roadside listening stations across the UK has confirmed that criminals are attempting to jam GPS signals on a regular basis. From the article: 'Government-funded trials involving the police have revealed more than a hundred incidents of GPS jammer use in the UK. The Sentinel project, which has been running since January 2011, was designed to measure GPS jamming on UK roads. The project, run by GPS-tracking company Chronos Technology, picked up the illegal jamming incidents via four GPS sensors in trials lasting from two to six months per location.'"

228 comments

Min score:

Reason:

Sort:

Not that much of a stretch, really... by gatorBYTE · 2012-02-22 20:11 · Score: 2

When you consider that a criminal will also monitor police radios as well.
1. Re:Not that much of a stretch, really... by Anonymous Coward · 2012-02-22 20:31 · Score: 5, Informative
  
  When you consider that a criminal will also monitor police radios as well.
  UK
  Google TETRA, or Terrestrial Trunked Radio..
  Ain't that easy anymore....
2. Re:Not that much of a stretch, really... by Joce640k · 2012-02-22 21:48 · Score: 3, Insightful
  
  Listening to police radio isn't something they can track.
  Broadcasting a signal on GPS frequencies...this seems stupid even by criminal standards. It's just asking to be stopped/searched (assuming the police get detectors, which they probably will after this report).
  
  --
  No sig today...
3. Re:Not that much of a stretch, really... by Electricity+Likes+Me · 2012-02-23 00:01 · Score: 4, Insightful
  
  "Criminals" aren't attempting anything.
  Random kids who wonder about signal jamming are looking up the plans online and testing out just how easy it is to do.
4. Re:Not that much of a stretch, really... by Anonymous Coward · 2012-02-23 00:05 · Score: 3, Interesting
  
  But for most things the criminals would need jammers for (like obstructing GPS tracking of valuable goods), they're not going to be using a whole lot of broadcasting power. Your detector is likely to only blip when the jammer is within 20ft or so. So unless you're right there with a detector when it goes by, it's still not going to be something you can home in on.
5. Re:Not that much of a stretch, really... by DrSkwid · 2012-02-23 00:32 · Score: 1
  
  but that's illegal !
  
  --
  There are places where the networks are not touching,and there are places where they are-Boeing's Lori Gunter
6. Re:Not that much of a stretch, really... by Anonymous Coward · 2012-02-23 00:47 · Score: 2, Funny
  
  Broadcasting a signal on GPS frequencies...this seems stupid even by criminal standards. It's just asking to be stopped/searched (assuming the police get detectors, which they probably will after this report).
  You make the assumption that this is something done by common criminals that can be caught. This is the UK we are talking about - the more likely rational is that the queen is having them jammed to spur uptake of Galileo based consumer devices and prevent people from ordering things from overseas while simultaneous helping justify the expenditure of a largely military network filling a niche already covered by an "ally" whose media the country has been infiltrating and skewing to generate an unproductive populace for over half a century. The still want their colonies back after-all.
7. Re:Not that much of a stretch, really... by 1s44c · 2012-02-23 01:09 · Score: 2, Insightful
  
  You are truly delusional.
  The one part of that that makes any rational sense is the bit about the UK wanting a non-US GPS system but you have the reasoning all wrong. The UK wants a non-US system because if they are tied into the US system the US can charge anything for it. Sure the US hasn't charged yet AFAIK but they could do the future.
  You always have multiple suppliers, it's a basic principle of not getting ripped off.
8. Re:Not that much of a stretch, really... by Megane · 2012-02-23 01:11 · Score: 2
  
  Maybe they can borrow the BBC's television detector vans to help find them.
  
  --
  #naabhaprzrag, #sverubfr-000, #agi-fcbafberq, negvpyr[pynff*=' negvpyr-ary-'] { qvfcynl: abar !vzcbegnag; }
9. Re:Not that much of a stretch, really... by gstoddart · 2012-02-23 02:39 · Score: 1
  
  The US also reserves the right to scramble it for their own purposes.
  So, as people become more dependent on GPS, having the American government suddenly make the system unusable isn't an attractive option.
  In the case of GPS, multiple suppliers is also redundancy.
  
  --
  Lost at C:>. Found at C.
10. Re:Not that much of a stretch, really... by CharlyFoxtrot · 2012-02-23 03:00 · Score: 1
  
  The one part of that that makes any rational sense is the bit about the UK wanting a non-US GPS system but you have the reasoning all wrong. The UK wants a non-US system because if they are tied into the US system the US can charge anything for it. Sure the US hasn't charged yet AFAIK but they could do the future.
  There's also the military applications. While we're allies and all the EU might want to perform military actions independent of NATO and then it doesn't help to be tied to a US system.
  
  --
  If all else fails, immortality can always be assured by spectacular error.
11. Re:Not that much of a stretch, really... by Anonymous Coward · 2012-02-23 03:04 · Score: 1
  
  So, as people become more dependent on GPS, having the American government suddenly make the system unusable isn't an attractive option.
  There is one attractive thing about it: it might teach them not to depend on GPS or any other single source.
12. Re:Not that much of a stretch, really... by EasyTarget · 2012-02-23 03:44 · Score: 2
  
  they're not going to be using a whole lot of broadcasting power.
  I would not bet on that.. People, especially avaricious types, tend to buy the most powerful kit they can.. And since the cheapest jammers will be the ones that substitute power for subtlety I suspect there will be a 'evolutionary' phase as the more stupid jammers users learn the hard way about this.
  Eventually word will get about and it will become a more localised an intermittent issue.
  
  --
  "Oops, I always forget the purpose of competition is to divide people into winners and losers." - Hobbes
13. Re:Not that much of a stretch, really... by Dark$ide · 2012-02-23 05:48 · Score: 1
  
  Maybe they can borrow the BBC's television detector vans to help find them.
  You may think TV Detector Vans a) exist and b) can detect TVs but I don't. I'm 100% convinced that TV Detector Vans are a carefully constructed Gov't hoax. The threat of the TV Detector Van is enough to pursuade most citizens to cough up the £142.50 TV Licence Fee (aka tax). The folks who don't pay that tax are now discovered by simple address matching. The TV Licensing Auth assumes a coverage of 100% of houses have TVs (and need to pay the tax). So they visit the ones that don't pay and occasionally visit the ones who claim to only have a B&W set. I've never seen a TV Detector Van in my forty nine years in the UK. I also think they're going to have a harder time spotting TVs that don't have CRTs.
  Note: This is horribly alien to the Americans who don't have a tax on TV.
  TV Detector Secrets
  The Gov't in the guise of GCHQ and the UK based Americans do have some massive RF listening stations dotted around the UK (a hang over from the cold war with the Soviets), so they would be able to triangulate a gound based transmitter sending a false/tainted GPS signal. But it won't be done with a mythical detector van. Menwith Hill being the most famous station.
  
  --
  Sigs. We don't need no steenking sigs.
14. Re:Not that much of a stretch, really... by 1s44c · 2012-02-23 06:07 · Score: 1
  
  'Independent of NATO' isn't the problem, against the interests of the US is the problem.
  The biggest threat to GPS is the US realizing it can get big piles of cash for something it appears to be giving away.
15. Re:Not that much of a stretch, really... by Apothem · 2012-02-23 08:04 · Score: 1
  
  Note: This is horribly alien to the Americans who don't have a tax on TV.
  No kidding. As someone who has never heard of this, it's really surprising to hear not only the tax, but also the stuff behind it. I really hope someone in the US doesn't get the bright idea to do something along this line to help fight 'childhood obesity' or some other weak excuse.
16. Re:Not that much of a stretch, really... by Megane · 2012-02-23 09:12 · Score: 1
  
  You may think TV Detector Vans a) exist
  But I know they exist! I saw one on Monty Python! Or was that The Young Ones? (Yes, we have a bloody video!)
  
  --
  #naabhaprzrag, #sverubfr-000, #agi-fcbafberq, negvpyr[pynff*=' negvpyr-ary-'] { qvfcynl: abar !vzcbegnag; }
17. Re:Not that much of a stretch, really... by Anonymous Coward · 2012-02-23 13:42 · Score: 0
  
  So a little privacy is now make one a criminal?
18. Re:Not that much of a stretch, really... by Dan541 · 2012-02-23 13:47 · Score: 1
  
  Also people who want a bit of privacy. A GPS jammer is intended to stop GPS trackers on the vehicle it's installed on. These days it should be a standard feature, GPS Capability on/off
  
  --
  An SQL query goes to a bar, walks up to a table and asks, "Mind if I join you?"
19. Re:Not that much of a stretch, really... by plover · 2012-02-23 14:58 · Score: 1
  
  You may think TV Detector Vans a) exist
  But I know they exist! I saw one on Monty Python! Or was that The Young Ones? (Yes, we have a bloody video!)
  No, that was a Cat Detector Van.
  Look, it's people like you what cause unrest!
  
  --
  John
20. Re:Not that much of a stretch, really... by Anonymous Coward · 2012-02-23 22:15 · Score: 0
  
  Lots of high end cars are fitted with tracking devices to aid recovery in the event of theft. A gps jammer will give the thieves time to take it to an obscure location, locate, and disable the tracking device.
21. Re:Not that much of a stretch, really... by Anonymous Coward · 2012-02-24 09:22 · Score: 0
  
  no
  GPS jamming is must have when you have stolen car with hight end security system. So jammer is just part of typical car-thief device set.
22. Re:Not that much of a stretch, really... by speculatrix · 2012-02-25 10:05 · Score: 1
  
  I did actually once see a TV detector van in Cambridge and there was some electronic equipment inside it, I could see someone looking at a screen when it drove past.
  The equipment would be a lot smaller these days, I'm told it's handheld, and the operator could triangulate the position of the TV to within a few feet.
  However, one problem is that they were really CRT detectors, as much as TV detectors, and I can imagine they are utterly useless for most flat panel.
  
  My experience of giving up TV for a while is that TV Licensing Ltd rely on automated nasty letters, and sometimes an "inspector" who will try and catch the person watching TV, or try to fool the householder into admitting guilt!
at the risk of sounding stupid.. by neokushan · 2012-02-22 20:12 · Score: 5, Interesting

Why block GPS? What do criminals gain from it? Genuine Queston.

--
+1 IDisagreeSoHeMustBeATrollOrAnAstroturferOrAShill
1. Re:at the risk of sounding stupid.. by gatorBYTE · 2012-02-22 20:13 · Score: 2
  
  well, it makes tracking cell phones a touch less accurate.
2. Re:at the risk of sounding stupid.. by Tarmas · 2012-02-22 20:14 · Score: 5, Informative
  
  FTFA:
  
  "People illegally jam GPS for a number of reasons, Curry told the audience at the conference at the National Physical Laboratory. These include evasion of company-vehicle or covert tracking, and stealing high-value vehicles."
  
  --
  Signature has left the building.
3. Re:at the risk of sounding stupid.. by phantomfive · 2012-02-22 20:18 · Score: 2, Interesting
  
  Asking the question doesn't make you sound stupid. Not thinking the answer might be in the article does. :)
  
  People illegally jam GPS for a number of reasons, Curry told the audience at the conference at the National Physical Laboratory. These include evasion of company-vehicle or covert tracking, and stealing high-value vehicles.
  Remember, there are no stupid questions, only stupid people!
  
  --
  "First they came for the slanderers and i said nothing."
4. Re:at the risk of sounding stupid.. by PolygamousRanchKid+ · 2012-02-22 20:19 · Score: 4, Insightful
  
  Redirect a GPS equipped armored car to your secret criminal location and land it safely. Just like the Iranians did with the drone.
  In old movies, criminals used fake "Detour" signs to re-route trucks carrying loot. Criminals are just getting high-tech savvy.
  
  --
  Schroedinger's Brexit: The UK is both in and out of the EU at the same time!
5. Re:at the risk of sounding stupid.. by biodata · 2012-02-22 20:20 · Score: 2
  
  Probably most people jam GPS so that organisations cannot spy on their vehicles through trackers, and it has nothing to do with criminality - they just want a bit of privacy while they go about their business in the company vehicle, and don't want someone snooping on them. The simple way to stop this would be to make it illegal to track people in this way, or mandatory for them to have a privacy switch which undetectably turned off the snooper.
  
  --
  Korma: Good
6. Re:at the risk of sounding stupid.. by Zoxed · 2012-02-22 20:21 · Score: 1
  
  > Why block GPS? What do criminals gain from it?
  Maybe to block trackers on stolen cars, or covert trackers on their own cars ?
  To make trailing of themselves by the police more difficult, esp. once the police start to rely to much on GPS, and less on local knowledge, paper maps etc.
7. Re:at the risk of sounding stupid.. by maxwells_deamon · 2012-02-22 20:21 · Score: 2
  
  My first guess was that I could see it being done here in the US to block lowjack and other tracking systems when you steal a car.
  And RTFM says that and people use it to evade company vehicle tracking systems. I guess that a gps system could be used to record when you drove to fast. Parked in front of someplace unsavory. If I was the company, I would want to know why my vehicle was reporting np signal for so long and why the odometer did not match the GPS. You could get away with it once or twice with saying it was broken. However, with a company vehicle, I think tinfoil sheilding would work better.
8. Re:at the risk of sounding stupid.. by AmiMoJo · 2012-02-22 20:23 · Score: 2
  
  I expect most of it is fraud, using tracked vehicles without them being tracked. There must be some trick to it because presumably the fact that the vehicle was started but no GPS signal was available should be logged. Even insurance companies are starting to use the technology now.
  Some people worry about being tracked by the police/security services too.
  
  --
  const int one = 65536; (Silvermoon, Texture.cs)
  SJW, n: "Someone I don't like, and by the way I'm a fuckwit" - AC
9. Re:at the risk of sounding stupid.. by biodata · 2012-02-22 20:26 · Score: 2
  
  s/criminals/people sleeping with the boss's wife? might not want to get tracked.
  
  --
  Korma: Good
10. Re:at the risk of sounding stupid.. by Anonymous Coward · 2012-02-22 20:30 · Score: 3, Insightful
  
  My first guess was that I could see it being done here in the US to block lowjack and other tracking systems when you steal a car.
  And RTFM says that and people use it to evade company vehicle tracking systems. I guess that a gps system could be used to record when you drove to fast. Parked in front of someplace unsavory. If I was the company, I would want to know why my vehicle was reporting np signal for so long and why the odometer did not match the GPS. You could get away with it once or twice with saying it was broken. However, with a company vehicle, I think tinfoil sheilding would work better.
  My guess is that it is used for "extra" journeys. You know, when you mention that you need a freezer moving and some guy says he will use the works van and do it for £10. They probably have to jam if for the whole journey so the company think its parked up for the evening.
11. Re:at the risk of sounding stupid.. by Duncan+Booth · 2012-02-22 20:32 · Score: 5, Interesting
  
  Possible but unlikely. I think at the moment they are just jamming the GPS signal which is really easy to do. To redirect you to another location they have to provide fake signals that your receiver will think are real. You can do that but it requires more sophisticated equipment. New Scientist had an article about GPS jamming last year and one of the more interesting things they suggested was that if you could distort the GPS instead of just jamming it you could cause mains blackouts over large areas of the US. Apparently US power stations use GPS as the reference time signal to ensure that the different power stations keep their generators in phase, so knock a few of them half a cycle out of phase and the entire network could come down.
12. Re:at the risk of sounding stupid.. by lightknight · 2012-02-22 20:36 · Score: 4, Interesting
  
  Honestly? The LEOs of today, based off of what limited information I have gathered, pale somewhat in comparison with the LEOs of yesteryear. That is to say the quality has dropped a fair amount with regards to the new recruits. Now, it's possible that the quality has remained the same, and it's only with the advent of new technology (cellphone cameras) are we finding out just how poor that quality has been all along...however, there are some limited indicators which suggest it may have been, on average, better at some point in the past.
  Investigators who need information spoon-fed to them, troopers who need to be constantly reminded of the laws they are supposed to be upholding...it's pretty bad.
  How does this relate to GPS? Well, as I outlined in a post a while back, officers are more reliant on technology today than times past. Mind you, I said reliant, not augmented by. As such, a typical officer cannot be guaranteed to actually memorize the various roads and streets that make up their own town / city, let alone the surrounding towns / cities. So, if you manage to knock out their GPS navigation systems, it's possible that they will not be able to find a route, let alone a quick one, to the scene of the crime nor plot an intercept course to pursue a suspect if he / she is still at large.
  If you pair up GPS jammers in concert with radio jammers, you can prevent officers from being notified about a crime in progress, as well as prevent them from finding their way to the scene (thus buying yourself time) is they manage to get around that (by using their cellphones or something more creative). In the event of a chase, officers typically need some level of communication to box-in a suspect (to get a car on either side, one in back, one in front, to force you to slow down). And so on.
  Since this is taking place in the UK, it could be a prelude to something 'interesting': rolling with the cliches here, someone planning a bank heist or to swipe the crown jewels. Or not: it could easily be a broken device broadcasting on the wrong channel, with the owner unaware; a broken CB radio in California once overpowered cellphones in the surrounding area, and no criminal intent was found. Or a prank.
  
  --
  I am John Hurt.
13. Re:at the risk of sounding stupid.. by queBurro · 2012-02-22 20:42 · Score: 5, Funny
  
  [Meaconing](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Meaconing) the GPS signal using the encoder, (and...) sending the British frigate HMS Devonshire off-course in the South China Sea
  
  --
  sag
14. Re:at the risk of sounding stupid.. by Anonymous Coward · 2012-02-22 20:44 · Score: 1
  
  Asking the question doesn't make you sound stupid. Not thinking the answer might be in the article does. :)
  I wondered about the same thing and found it stupid that the summary didn't mention it. You shouldn't have to read the article to get that information.
15. Re:at the risk of sounding stupid.. by Anonymous Coward · 2012-02-22 20:48 · Score: 5, Funny
  
  But that's just stupid! You don't have to invest in a GPS jammer, which is illegal probably in most places too. You can just wrap your whole care in tinfoil. TA-DA!
16. Re:at the risk of sounding stupid.. by MichaelSmith · 2012-02-22 20:52 · Score: 5, Insightful
  
  evasion of company-vehicle or covert tracking
  Yeah there is a scandal here in Australia at the moment with a trucking company disabling speed limiters. Corrupting GPS trace information would be the other half of the picture.
  
  --
  http://michaelsmith.id.au
17. Re:at the risk of sounding stupid.. by lexsird · 2012-02-22 20:57 · Score: 2
  
  Obligatory response is obligatory.
  http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FcArnepkhv0
  
  --
  Take the Red Pill.
18. Re:at the risk of sounding stupid.. by oobayly · 2012-02-22 21:06 · Score: 4, Funny
  
  I remember this being in the news, it nearly started a war. Luckily some English chap and a Chinese bird managed to stop Rupert Murdock before it was too late.
19. Re:at the risk of sounding stupid.. by viperidaenz · 2012-02-22 21:11 · Score: 3, Insightful
  
  .... because a national power grid would rely entirely on a wireless signal and have no redundancy whatsoever
20. Re:at the risk of sounding stupid.. by viperidaenz · 2012-02-22 21:13 · Score: 2
  
  Or have people not misusing company vehicles for private use.
21. Re:at the risk of sounding stupid.. by Hadlock · 2012-02-22 21:15 · Score: 1
  
  the fact that the vehicle was started but no GPS signal was available should be logged
  Presumably newer GPS units will be programmed around this, but if your jammer is sending out a signal that says it's the GPS sattelite currently over Cape Town, and it's also reading the signals from the sattelites currently over london, paris and and moscow,it's going to triangulate your position as being somewhere near Egypt or The Congo.
  
  Sort of like if you have a multitouch trackpad and put two fingers on there and the mouse averages between the two, and then you put your thumb on there and the mouse moves again to a new center location.
  
  --
  moox. for a new generation.
22. Re:at the risk of sounding stupid.. by Anonymous Coward · 2012-02-22 21:21 · Score: 2, Funny
  
  I wondered about the same thing and found it stupid that the summary didn't mention it. You shouldn't have to read the article to get that information.
  You shouldn't even have to read the summary. Slashdot should just telepathically transmit the information directly into your brain.
23. Re:at the risk of sounding stupid.. by Anonymous Coward · 2012-02-22 21:48 · Score: 0
  
  It is much cheaper that way.
24. Re:at the risk of sounding stupid.. by billcopc · 2012-02-22 21:54 · Score: 4, Insightful
  
  Depends on your definition of "criminal".
  GPS navigation is generally a good thing. GPS tracking is a slippery thing, seen by some as an invasion of privacy. The vehicle owner should be entitled to know where their property is, but it is none of their business where I go and what I do during the day. Insurance companies would love to hike premiums based on where you park, where you eat, how many mistresses you entertain, or those brief stops in the seedy part of town.
  I cannot speak for the UK, but in some parts of the world, you can get fined for speeding in a rental vehicle - by the rental company, not the police! I would gladly jam a device used to defraud me in such fashion. Traffic management is a police matter, not a private one.
  On one hand, GPS tracking can help against theft, or at least facilitate recovery. On the other hand, it opens up a wealth of possibilities for abuse. The dilemma is in deciding if the pros outweigh the cons (no pun intended).
  
  --
  -Billco, Fnarg.com
25. Re:at the risk of sounding stupid.. by billcopc · 2012-02-22 21:56 · Score: 5, Funny
  
  You must be new to America.
  
  --
  -Billco, Fnarg.com
26. Re:at the risk of sounding stupid.. by billcopc · 2012-02-22 21:59 · Score: 2
  
  This is precisely the problem: should insurance companies be allowed to track your every movement ?
  I am extremely anti-insurance, so my answer is no. I would support jamming GPS devices used to track my whereabouts against my will. That's just an opinion though.
  
  --
  -Billco, Fnarg.com
27. Re:at the risk of sounding stupid.. by Anonymous Coward · 2012-02-22 22:26 · Score: 1
  
  What do you mean, "the article"? What's that?
28. Re:at the risk of sounding stupid.. by delt0r · 2012-02-22 22:33 · Score: 2
  
  You only have to check the frequency stability at your socket to set of the hinky meter with statements like "the grid uses GPS for critical timing". We had the grid *long* before GPS and it worked fine. In fact i can't see anything useful that GPS would provide, since you need to PLL to the local grid anyway. Which will have its own local drifts etc. Considering that it takes mins and hours for generators to ramp up or down, i simply can't see what useful thing GPS is doing here.
  
  --
  If information wants to be free, why does my internet connection cost so much?
29. Re:at the risk of sounding stupid.. by Anonymous Coward · 2012-02-22 22:54 · Score: 5, Interesting
  
  I work for a telemetry company. Our units have a privacy mode the driver can activate when off duty.
  GPS jamming is also only really going to hide location, since these units are connected to the vehicle's CANBUS so read engine rpm, wheel speed, crazy acceleration, braking, cornering etc. So when the jamming is removed, it will still report back you drove the company car 500 miles at an average wheel speed of 86mph, with peaks of 112.
  Plus its blatantly obvious when the data stream stops due to comms failure.
30. Re:at the risk of sounding stupid.. by Guignol · 2012-02-22 22:57 · Score: 2
  
  It can allow you to illegally go faster than light ;)
31. Re:at the risk of sounding stupid.. by DrSkwid · 2012-02-22 23:04 · Score: 1, Funny
  
  We don't have odometers. We have mileometers. :)
  But on the garlicontinent they have kilometerometers.
  
  --
  There are places where the networks are not touching,and there are places where they are-Boeing's Lori Gunter
32. Re:at the risk of sounding stupid.. by Anonymous Coward · 2012-02-22 23:08 · Score: 1
  
  GPS does not work like that, and never did - it's not triangulating.
  Otherwise, sure. There's no reason the vehicle can't have a slightly expanded black box, including at least the odometer data.
33. Re:at the risk of sounding stupid.. by C0vardeAn0nim0 · 2012-02-22 23:10 · Score: 4, Informative
  
  that's a whole lot of bullshit right there.
  i know wikipedia is not a reliable source for any argumentation, but here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Synchroscope
  this is what's in use on power grids all over the world since the concept of interconnected generators was invented.
  
  --
  What ? Me, worry ?
34. Re:at the risk of sounding stupid.. by Lumpy · 2012-02-22 23:34 · Score: 1
  
  makes the modern car theft systems not track you. Lojack still works though.
  
  --
  Do not look at laser with remaining good eye.
35. Re:at the risk of sounding stupid.. by BlueStrat · 2012-02-22 23:38 · Score: 4, Interesting
  
  Why block GPS? What do criminals gain from it? Genuine Queston.
  What I'm surprised by is the apparent lack of incidents involving criminals using broad-banded jammers to kill ALL radio-based communications in a certain area.
  For instance, in the case of police conducting a taskforce drug-sweep through a gang-controlled neighborhood/apartment complex/etc, I could easily imagine the gang's lookouts giving the sign when the cops & SWAT starts to roll into the area, the gangsters then start up the jammers, killing all police radios as well as cell phones, GPS, and anything else depending on radio.
  That would remove an absolutely enormous tactical advantage from the police if they are unable to call for assistance or relay information about suspect activities, whereabouts, direction of travel, or even that an officer (or many) has/have been shot and is/are bleeding out in the alley behind the target building while the suspects safely escape.
  A mobile version in a criminal's vehicle would also be a great help in losing or ambushing pursuing officers.
  As a former amateur radio operator and RF electronics technician, it really wouldn't take much in material costs to rig up a series of car battery powered broadband jammers able to block any radio or GPS use within a couple-block area. You could probably pick up everything one would need to construct such a jamming system for less than a couple hundred dollars (depending on your haggling skills) from the typical amateur radio "hamfest" used electronics buy/sell/trade event and not leave a paper trail.
  Now, THAT should send chills down LE spines! Without his/her radio/cellphone, a cop is just another asshole with a gun, and dies just as easily. Hopefully, the uniforms and shiny bits should make them stand out and easily enough sorted from bystanders by the gang's snipers to avoid most collateral casualties.
  Hmm. Maybe I should work up some schematic drawings and layouts, and post them online if I get some spare time. I wonder if DHS/ICE would have the drawings taken off the 'net?
  Strat
  
  --
  Progressivism (aka US 'Liberalism'): Ideas so good they need a police/surveillance-state to enforce.
36. Re:at the risk of sounding stupid.. by Anonymous Coward · 2012-02-22 23:42 · Score: 1
  
  I think the media mogul character was based on a combination of Rupert Murdoch and Robert Maxwell. Both own/owned trashy media empires with delusions of self-importance. Maxwell went, er, missing from his luxury boat (his body later discovered in the sea).
37. Re:at the risk of sounding stupid.. by RoboRay · 2012-02-22 23:53 · Score: 1
  
  Redirect a GPS equipped armored car to your secret criminal location and land it safely. Just like the Iranians did with the drone.
  In old movies, criminals used fake "Detour" signs to re-route trucks carrying loot. Criminals are just getting high-tech savvy.
  It's a documented and well-known fact that the Iranians did not use forged GPS or other transmitted data to redirect that drone.
  They could have sent up a fake "Detour" sign hanging from a balloon, though.
38. Re:at the risk of sounding stupid.. by Anonymous Coward · 2012-02-23 00:14 · Score: 2, Insightful
  
  Regardless of the privacy issues involved in GPS use, GPS jamming is not an acceptable solution. Your jammer will interfere with other people trying to use GPS unless you're using it away from public roads and flightpaths, in the middle of nowhere. GPS is used in a vast number of ways, many of which are not obvious - elsewhere in the comments somebody pointed out that GPS timing signals are used in regulating power grid frequency for instance.
39. Re:at the risk of sounding stupid.. by Anonymous Coward · 2012-02-23 00:25 · Score: 3, Funny
  
  Hmm, I think the signal's being jammed...
40. Re:at the risk of sounding stupid.. by Anonymous Coward · 2012-02-23 00:32 · Score: 5, Informative
  
  I'm a Protection Engineer. We have GPS at every substation in order to timestamp, down to the millisecond, faults. Helps us determine where the fault started, who tripped first, etc. It's a protection coordination thing. It's also required for Synchrophasors, which is a way to monitor power flows, system stability, and system disturbances at a very fine level. When you have several readings coming in from geographically spread out locations, all with the same down-to-the-millisecond timestamp, you can get a good feel on how the transmission grid is performing.
41. Re:at the risk of sounding stupid.. by commlinx · 2012-02-23 00:35 · Score: 3, Informative
  
  I'm far from an expert on power distribution, but doing some work with GPS some years a potential client contacted me about a custom IRIG-B timing signal generator using GPS as the clock reference. The project didn't go ahead but from my understanding during initial discussions you're correct about a PLL type sync required to the local grid and that it takes time to adjust a generator's frequency. Where GPS timing comes into play are for grids that aren't normally connected so they can re-route power in case of outages and have it perfectly in phase when it comes online without the delays you mention.
42. Re:at the risk of sounding stupid.. by DrSkwid · 2012-02-23 00:49 · Score: 2
  
  > extremely anti-insurance
  So if I lost an arm in an accident that was your fault, you've got Â£75k knocking about to pay my compensation ?
  Or less extreme, how about Â£15k if I just broke my arm when hitting your car on my bicycle ?
  
  --
  There are places where the networks are not touching,and there are places where they are-Boeing's Lori Gunter
43. Re:at the risk of sounding stupid.. by delt0r · 2012-02-23 00:55 · Score: 1
  
  Very interesting. I don't dispute GPS as an accurate global clock, and nowdays a very cheap one. Makes sense that it would be very useful for logging and monitoring.
  
  However this still implies that no GPS does not mean no Grid as many seem to claim.
  
  --
  If information wants to be free, why does my internet connection cost so much?
44. Re:at the risk of sounding stupid.. by ub3r+n3u7r4l1st · 2012-02-23 00:57 · Score: 1
  
  Once you get to the point where the national guard or the military is involved, you get a whole new level to deal with. They might be communicating using some Z-waves for example.
  
  --
  New Economic Perspectives
45. Re:at the risk of sounding stupid.. by biodata · 2012-02-23 01:09 · Score: 3, Interesting
  
  Jammers are the only way to prevent this invasion of privacy though. Until laws are mading forcing corporations to back off and stop tracking people, people will use whatever tools are available. If you find the general population start jamming GPS (rather than criminals on some kind of heist) then the only way to realistic defend the GPS is to remove the threat to it - invasion of privacy by corporations. Don't get me wrong, I understand why they want to hijack GPS for their own financial gain, but this is not its purpose, and criminalising people who legitimately want privacy will not protec the GPS.
  
  --
  Korma: Good
46. Re:at the risk of sounding stupid.. by 1s44c · 2012-02-23 01:13 · Score: 1
  
  Why block GPS? What do criminals gain from it? Genuine Queston.
  Really petty stuff actually. If I'm given a GPS tracked work car I could use a signal jammer to prevent work seeing I'm taking a detour or a long lunch break.
  It's not hardened professional bank robbers being called 'criminals' here, it's white-van-man who wants to take his GF shopping with his work van and doesn't want his boss to know about it. These people likely don't know that GPS jamming is criminal.
47. Re:at the risk of sounding stupid.. by Anonymous Coward · 2012-02-23 01:15 · Score: 1
  
  Saved time by not reading the article, and gets the answer in his inbox. Seems pretty smart to me.
48. Re:at the risk of sounding stupid.. by 1s44c · 2012-02-23 01:16 · Score: 2
  
  I think you might have just broken some of your countries anti-terrorism laws by telling us that.
49. Re:at the risk of sounding stupid.. by dave420 · 2012-02-23 01:19 · Score: 1
  
  But using someone else's property against their wishes is criminality, though. Just because you agree with it doesn't instantly mean it's fine.
50. Re:at the risk of sounding stupid.. by dave420 · 2012-02-23 01:21 · Score: 1
  
  Aaah, so you're selfish. Gotcha. That explains it.
51. Re:at the risk of sounding stupid.. by dave420 · 2012-02-23 01:29 · Score: 1
  
  If you want to get cheaper insurance by having your car's position monitored, it's a bit stupid to then complain that your car's position is being monitored. The only slippery slope you described is people wanting stuff they don't want to pay for. And of course rental companies can give you a fine if you break the law in one of their vehicles. "Traffic management" is up to whoever owns the traffic or is responsible for its safe use.
52. Re:at the risk of sounding stupid.. by biodata · 2012-02-23 01:32 · Score: 1
  
  The GPS is more important than some petty car mileage fraud though. Apparently our whole civilisation is threatened if the GPS becomes unreliable. If the integrity of the GPS is threatened by this epidemic of people trying to fiddle their mileage, then the only real solution is to remove the root cause of the threat (corporate snooping) because people will always find ways to fiddle their mileage. The companies doing the snooping are effectively crowd-sourcing a DDOS on GPS.
  
  --
  Korma: Good
53. Re:at the risk of sounding stupid.. by MiniMike · 2012-02-23 01:37 · Score: 1
  
  Maybe they jam the GPS signal and then put up a "Detour" sign?
54. Re:at the risk of sounding stupid.. by GameboyRMH · 2012-02-23 01:44 · Score: 1
  
  Disables all kinds of GPS tracking equipment (as found on ATMs and in OnStar/LoJack for example) although you should use a cell jammer as well or you're only doing half the job.
  
  --
  "When information is power, privacy is freedom" - Jah-Wren Ryel
55. Re:at the risk of sounding stupid.. by rlp · 2012-02-23 01:49 · Score: 1
  
  Yeah, saw a documentary about this on TV. You jam the GPS, put up a "Detour" sign, paint the side of a cliff to look like a tunnel, and put some bird seed on the road ... oh, wait ...
  
  --
  [Insert pithy quote here]
56. Re:at the risk of sounding stupid.. by deek · 2012-02-23 01:52 · Score: 4, Funny
  
  Jammed? Raspberry! There's only one man who would dare give me Raspberry. CowboyNeal !
57. Re:at the risk of sounding stupid.. by Anonymous Coward · 2012-02-23 01:56 · Score: 2, Interesting
  
  We used to do this on our HMMWVs on field exercises when we went for a shower or food run. There was a device called an EPLRS, which among other things reported the vehicle location back to headquarters. We merely unscrewed the antenna. To make it less suspicious, we randomly loosened antennas on the command HMMWVs and claimed it was vehicle vibration that loosened the cheap milspec connector.
58. Re:at the risk of sounding stupid.. by Ihmhi · 2012-02-23 02:43 · Score: 1
  
  Yeah, that's almost as insane as having a national power grid that has unpatched Windows XP PCs connected live to the Internet! It'd never happen.
  
  --
  Random Thoughts From A Diseased Mind (Not For Dummies)
59. Re:at the risk of sounding stupid.. by mindcandy · 2012-02-23 02:44 · Score: 1
  
  Yeah, and you can do the same basic thing if you've got an off-grid cabin with 2 60w bulbs wired inbetwen your genset and the utility .. just tinker with the engine speed until the lights stay off and throw the switch.
  
  A synchroscope is seriously outdated tech .. nowdays it's all done by computer.
60. Re:at the risk of sounding stupid.. by d3ac0n · 2012-02-23 02:48 · Score: 1
  
  The jammers don't work like that. They are much simpler.
  GPS jammers simply send out garbage data on a VERY strong local GPS signal and swamp the GPS receiver with crap data. It can't hear the whispering satellite signal because of the "turned up to 11" white noise speaker right in it's ear. Not complicated at all.
  
  --
  Official Heretic from the "Church of Global Warming". Proven right thanks to whistle blowers. AGW = Flat Earth Theory
61. Re:at the risk of sounding stupid.. by Ihmhi · 2012-02-23 02:48 · Score: 4, Funny
  
  The mistake you make is thinking that such an intelligent idea would be used by a group of people who think that holding a handgun sideways is a good thing.
  
  --
  Random Thoughts From A Diseased Mind (Not For Dummies)
62. Re:at the risk of sounding stupid.. by fizzer06 · 2012-02-23 02:58 · Score: 1
  
  I seem to remember Wile E. Coyote trying something like that with the Roadrunner.
63. Re:at the risk of sounding stupid.. by Technician · 2012-02-23 03:02 · Score: 3, Informative
  
  You are correct that a syncroscope is used to connect a generator. What you missed is GPS time is used to locate a fault on a line due to the time of propagation of a fault current from the fault to various substations. In a lightning storm a lightning storm and loss of GPS signal can result in bad fault location information. The line will trip out at both ends, but fail to re-energize the line due to a false indication of substations islanding. Re-connecting substations that have islanded is not automatic. The failure to re-connect can result in cascading failures.
  http://ieeexplore.ieee.org/xpl/freeabs_all.jsp?arnumber=5542044
  
  --
  The truth shall set you free!
64. Re:at the risk of sounding stupid.. by Anonymous Coward · 2012-02-23 03:02 · Score: 0
  
  [Meaconing](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Meaconing) the GPS signal using the encoder, (and...) sending the British frigate HMS Devonshire off-course in the South China Sea
  Military GPS signals are protected (encrypted? signed?) via RSA, so spoofing isn't a problem. (Assuming that the RSA key hasn't been factor.)
65. Re:at the risk of sounding stupid.. by Rhacman · 2012-02-23 03:11 · Score: 1
  
  You could also refuse to be assigned a company owned vehicle by virtue of the requirement that it be tracked. That may impact your ability to continue employment at that company and would thus be a personal sacrifice in the name of defending your own principles. Defending your principles by voicing your opinion and making personal sacrifices is something that I can respect, even if I don't agree with your opinion. Doing so by recklessly interferring with the ability of others to use a legitimate (and in some cases critical) service is neither an approach nor a mindset I have any degree of respect for.
  
  --
  Account -> Discussions -> Disable Sigs
66. Re:at the risk of sounding stupid.. by Anonymous Coward · 2012-02-23 03:12 · Score: 0
  
  I'd say this would be a good reason:
  http://www.wired.com/threatlevel/2011/11/gps-tracker-times-two/all/1
67. Re:at the risk of sounding stupid.. by interkin3tic · 2012-02-23 03:15 · Score: 3, Funny
  
  Redirect a GPS equipped armored car to your secret criminal location and land it safely.
  (In a Wells Fargo truck)
  Mike: Hey, uh, Bob, WHERE THE HELL are we going?
  Bob: GPS says the bank is just up ahead.
  Mike: The GPS says the bank is in that abandoned looking warehouse?
  Bob: It also says that we should throw our guns out the window now.
  Mike: (unholstering) What did we do before these things were invented?
68. Re:at the risk of sounding stupid.. by gbjbaanb · 2012-02-23 03:21 · Score: 1
  
  apart from the sensible answers along the lines of "so Jack Bauer can't track your ass", one reason is that criminals used to regularly call 999 (911 in the UK) and tell the police that they were "dealing drugs and you stupid coppers can't stop us, hahahaha". Of course, with a GPS signal from that mobile, the police could stop them :)
69. Re:at the risk of sounding stupid.. by Anonymous Coward · 2012-02-23 03:25 · Score: 0
  
  The way the word is typically used in the media, "criminal" approximately means "not law abiding".
  In the UK, "law abiding" is exactly "unthinking coward".
70. Re:at the risk of sounding stupid.. by interkin3tic · 2012-02-23 03:29 · Score: 1
  
  Regardless of the privacy issues involved in GPS use, GPS jamming is not an acceptable solution.
  
  I don't think other people's right to use GPS to navigate should automatically trump my right to privacy. If the government is tracking me without a warrant, I'd say I'm definitely morally in the clear by using a GPS jammer, even if that means the guy next to me can't find the nearest McDonalds. That would be stupid of me to do, since I would have just given them an excuse to arrest me, but as far as moral justification goes, no, GPS jamming could be an acceptable solution to privacy violations.
71. Re:at the risk of sounding stupid.. by Sentrion · 2012-02-23 03:35 · Score: 1
  
  Judging from most Slashdot posts it looks like reading the summary or TFA is just an optional "academic" exercise.
72. Re:at the risk of sounding stupid.. by biodata · 2012-02-23 03:49 · Score: 1
  
  I kind of agree with you, but many people don't care about the public good, know there is little chance of being caught, and so will jam for a small financial or personal gain, or to maintain their privacy. This undermines the stability of the GPS, arguably, but no government can stamp out low-level abuses like this, except by removing the impetus that is leading human nature to the abuse. People are people and will ignore inconvenient laws if they feel it's in their interest.
  
  --
  Korma: Good
73. Re:at the risk of sounding stupid.. by Anonymous Coward · 2012-02-23 03:50 · Score: 3, Informative
  
  Me again. You're right, protective relays work fine without GPS. We just use them for event analysis and synchrophasors. Old fashioned synchroscopes are still in use here as well (I've got a job where we're putting a new one in next month).
  Grid would work FINE without GPS. Event analysis and reporting wouldn't work fine, but the grid would. There are far easier and low-tech ways to seriously interrupt the power system though.
74. Re:at the risk of sounding stupid.. by green1 · 2012-02-23 03:58 · Score: 1
  
  Maybe it's just me... but if you want your company vehicle to not be tracked, wouldn't it be easier to disconnect the tracker than to buy a GPS jammer? Either way your boss is going to know something is up by the lack of data.
  (And yes, I'm speaking as someone with a company vehicle that is tracked by GPS, and although I've never felt the need, I know many of my co-workers have cut either the antenna or power leads to the trackers in their vehicles)
75. Re:at the risk of sounding stupid.. by green1 · 2012-02-23 04:05 · Score: 1
  
  Theoretically Insurance companies aren't tracking against your will, they are simply offering you a discount if you agree to the tracking.
  I don't actually have a problem with that, however I DO have a problem with where I see this leading. Unfortunately I forsee a time where it's no longer a "discount" for tracking, but a very large premium for not tracking, and that is definitely not right.
  As long as insurance is mandated by the government, the government also needs to mandate that the insurance companies do so in a fair, reasonable, and non-privacy-invading way.
76. Re:at the risk of sounding stupid.. by Adam+Appel · 2012-02-23 04:07 · Score: 1
  
  My assumption would be that any police force with reasonable tech to detect a "blackout" would call the NSA, CIA, MI6, FBI, TSA and everybody else they could think of. It's pretty easy to disable a police net with 10 (or however many channels the area you wish to effect has) handheld [say Puxing 667's for $60 each bought off ebay direct ffrom HK, no FCC LISC or easy trail] duct-tape to the top of a city bus or hidden on rooftops with with transmitters keyed and a 100 gps blockers dumped in stragic locals. But any police force with a plan may have legacy radios, you would still have a few hours. I write with a minor understanding of a sample municipality in the USA, I haven't the faintest how it works in the UK. Don't forget use snowmobiles or dirt bikes (as needed in your town) with your own sideband com net. Oh and lasers for the helo- LEO pilots protect their birds something wicked. I am sure another 10 minutes of thought is needed to really plan out the perfect crime.
  
  --
  They come in the dark, only in the darkest.
77. Re:at the risk of sounding stupid.. by Anonymous Coward · 2012-02-23 04:07 · Score: 0
  
  Why block GPS? What do criminals gain from it? Genuine Queston.
  let's immagine for a second here that fbi cia and nsa had never been caught with their hands in the cookie jar putting gps emitters on people cars without a warrant ...
78. Re:at the risk of sounding stupid.. by thrich81 · 2012-02-23 04:26 · Score: 1
  
  Quite often you get some techie who thinks they are smarter than everyone else bragging or fantasizing about how they can "take down the man". Well, "the man" has smarter people available and unlimited resources. If the police can't handle your crime wave (and many of them have military toys they are itching to use) then the National Guard will bring whatever it takes. As hard as it is for the libertarians to believe, most people would rather not live in a neighborhood where the gangs are trying to outgun the police. This is why there is monitoring of the Internet, etc with the general support of the populace (oh, I forgot, -- the "sheep"). The sheep and the police will win as long as they are both content with their arrangement.
79. Re:at the risk of sounding stupid.. by Sentrion · 2012-02-23 04:27 · Score: 1
  
  Such a powerful jamming device would be relatively easy to home-in on. However, for a short duration such jamming would be useful during a bank heist. Given all the people in direct view of the crime would be calling 911, jamming all signals might buy enough time for a quick getaway.
  BTW - even commercially available cell-phone jammers can potentially disrupt police digital radios, as described in this article:
  http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/2134869/posts
  If anyone has doubts about whether jamming would really work or not, consider that SWAT teams employ such jammers during hostage situations to isolate the perpetrators, but these jammers specifically target the frequencies the perpetrators would be expected to use, like cell phones and maybe handheld HAM radios.
  For greatest effectiveness of jamming the widest range of RF frequencies for the widest radius, use a spark-gap generator. These were the earliest form of wireless communication but banned in 1916 because they interfered with all other frequencies. They were used during WWI, WWII, and the Cold War to jam radio communication, and they tended to jam all signals indiscriminately.
  One episode of Burn Notice involved using a spark gap generator as part of a trap to make a group of Westin's adversaries appear to be planning a bank heist. The prop used in the show however looked more like a "Jacob's Ladder" from a middle school science project.
80. Re:at the risk of sounding stupid.. by Anonymous Coward · 2012-02-23 04:33 · Score: 0
  
  Its not necessarily 'criminals' doing it - all they have noted is that 'illegal' blocking happens.
  Those chaps down at MI5 and SIS like to take a 'broad' approach when out driving - broadcast loud white noise over as many frequencies as possible. Interfering with GPS allows them to avoid their cars being tagged with GPS receivers and tracked, which is handy if you're a paranoid SIS agent.
81. Re:at the risk of sounding stupid.. by Nick+Number · 2012-02-23 04:53 · Score: 1
  
  We don't have odometers. We have mileometers. :)
  That's ridiculous. What do you do when you need to measure René Auberjonois?
  
  --
  Promote proofreading. Don't mod up sloppy posts.
82. Re:at the risk of sounding stupid.. by tlhIngan · 2012-02-23 04:57 · Score: 1
  
  Honestly? The LEOs of today, based off of what limited information I have gathered, pale somewhat in comparison with the LEOs of yesteryear. That is to say the quality has dropped a fair amount with regards to the new recruits. Now, it's possible that the quality has remained the same, and it's only with the advent of new technology (cellphone cameras) are we finding out just how poor that quality has been all along...however, there are some limited indicators which suggest it may have been, on average, better at some point in the past.
  Very likely, actually.
  In the past, policing was considered a noble profession and being a policeman was considered an honor. Of course, the few very public police mistreatment cases has made the public very skeptical (and the war on drugs hasn't really helped), and the end result is ever-tightening police budgets and such.
  In the end, the good officers wonder why they're bothering to risk their lives for a position that gets little respect and they leave. And there's literally no one to replace them (most police departments actually have openings for new officers, but the number of recruits coming out never meet the required number).
  The sad end to this is well, the people who would be good officers end up getting other jobs (not necessarily out of pay either - respect and other factors often come into play), while those on power trips end up being the ones departments hire, simply because they need more officers and that's the lot they get to pick from.
  In short, it's doesn't pay to be a police officer, unless you just want to go on power trips, and with that mentality, it's just a self-reinforcing cycle. It's a tough job, and departments really only have bottom-of-the-barrel type people to choose from.
83. Re:at the risk of sounding stupid.. by Rich0 · 2012-02-23 05:01 · Score: 1
  
  Doing so by recklessly interferring with the ability of others to use a legitimate (and in some cases critical) service is neither an approach nor a mindset I have any degree of respect for.
  I dunno - people have almost no ability to influence employer policies. Sure, if you're a top-notch anything you can, but if you're average you just have to go with the flow. If that flow involves doing something onerous, I can't blame people for not wanting to do it. If government isn't willing to regulate stuff that is ridiculous, then people will take the law into their own hands.
  It isn't unlike towns that place 35mph speed limits on roads that can tolerate much faster speeds. People will drive the speed they feel is safe (55mph or so), and giving 5 people a month tickets won't have much impact on the other 5k cars per day that drive down the road.
  The only way that a majority of people will break laws in a democracy is if it isn't really a democracy.
84. Re:at the risk of sounding stupid.. by Anonymous Coward · 2012-02-23 05:03 · Score: 0
  
  That means finding the transmitter (and quickly remember your stealing it). Trucks sometimes have loads worth millions. Hell the trucks themselves can be worth a quarter million and up...
85. Re:at the risk of sounding stupid.. by LordSnooty · 2012-02-23 05:05 · Score: 1
  
  You couldn't think of _any_ reason to jam GPS signals on a very local basis? You must have no imagination.
86. Re:at the risk of sounding stupid.. by TubeSteak · 2012-02-23 05:07 · Score: 1
  
  Honestly? The LEOs of today, based off of what limited information I have gathered, pale somewhat in comparison with the LEOs of yesteryear. That is to say the quality has dropped a fair amount with regards to the new recruits. Now, it's possible that the quality has remained the same, and it's only with the advent of new technology (cellphone cameras) are we finding out just how poor that quality has been all along...however, there are some limited indicators which suggest it may have been, on average, better at some point in the past.
  You are not just wrong, but extremely wrong.
  Delve through some history books or old newspapers and you'll find that there were massive police scandals in the past.
  1. Our police force has become more professional than it used to be, even though corruption and abuse still exist
  2. What "limited indicators" suggest police performance has been better in the past? Increased reporting always makes the present look worse, even if it isn't.
  
  --
  [Fuck Beta]
  o0t!
87. Re:at the risk of sounding stupid.. by ZFox · 2012-02-23 05:26 · Score: 1
  
  wouldn't it be easier to disconnect the tracker than to buy a GPS jammer?
  
  No they are fairly cheap and imagine a situation where the driver gets a random vehicle from a motor pool or regularly has to switch company vehicles.
88. Re:at the risk of sounding stupid.. by Paracelcus · 2012-02-23 05:36 · Score: 1
  
  I think that (aside from grand theft) the proper application would be to prevent tracking of your own vehicle! Detect the GPS transmitter (scanners are available on-line) and remove or disable it.
  A matter of privacy, keep Big Brother out of as much as possible!
  
  --
  I killed da wabbit -Elmer Fudd
89. Re:at the risk of sounding stupid.. by Raenex · 2012-02-23 05:55 · Score: 1
  
  JThis undermines the stability of the GPS, arguably, but no government can stamp out low-level abuses like this, except by removing the impetus that is leading human nature to the abuse.
  If the government is serious about it, then yes, they can. If they can install traffic and street lights on the vast majority of roads then they can install GPS sensors, too.
90. Re:at the risk of sounding stupid.. by viperidaenz · 2012-02-23 06:17 · Score: 1
  
  I'm glad I don't live in that country
91. Re:at the risk of sounding stupid.. by tqk · 2012-02-23 06:22 · Score: 1
  
  Some people worry about being tracked by the police/security services too.
  The police & security services worry about being tracked too. Another article I read about this (either the Register or Inquirer) theorized this whole thing was being caused by the local authorities driving by and overloading the transmitters with jamming signals. "Ha haaa!"
  Pretty stupid too since they could have just installed an off switch for the times they didn't need to be tracked (on their way to a bust).
  
  --
  "Tongue tied and twisted, just an Earth bound misfit ..." -- Pink Floyd.
92. Re:at the risk of sounding stupid.. by biodata · 2012-02-23 06:24 · Score: 1
  
  I agree, they can install speed cameras or whatever, but a large proportion of the population continues to ignore the speed laws and speed in between the cameras. Similarly with tracking, the more corporations try to track people the more people will try to jam GPS, and undermine it for everyone. You can install whatever ou want but you can't stamp out natural human behaviour when it is driven by stronger forces such as emotion or greed.
  
  --
  Korma: Good
93. Re:at the risk of sounding stupid.. by Raenex · 2012-02-23 06:32 · Score: 1
  
  It's very easy to speed, and anybody driving the car is capable, and it's also tolerated within certain limits because it is so prevalent.
  It's much harder to jam GPS. You have to go out of your way to explicitly do so, and most people don't do much to protect their privacy. If GPS jamming becomes a real enough problem the government can shut it down.
94. Re:at the risk of sounding stupid.. by Anonymous Coward · 2012-02-23 06:32 · Score: 0
  
  Knock a generator out of phase, as you put it, and watch that generator get up and walk across the floor. Literally. A generator which is out of phase with the rest of the power grid has incredible force applied to it to get in phase instantaneously, which force is frequently greater than anything holding the generator in place.
95. Re:at the risk of sounding stupid.. by jeff4747 · 2012-02-23 07:37 · Score: 1
  
  you can get fined for speeding in a rental vehicle - by the rental company, not the police! I would gladly jam a device used to defraud me in such fashion.
  Because the only way the rental car knows it's speed is through GPS. It's not like there's a computer in there that can report back wheel speed via a standard computer interface in the passenger-side footwell.
96. Re:at the risk of sounding stupid.. by Anonymous Coward · 2012-02-23 08:16 · Score: 0
  
  O, By Darnit II now you've put your finger on it.
97. Re:at the risk of sounding stupid.. by billcopc · 2012-02-23 08:19 · Score: 1
  
  Perhaps the correct solution would be a low-radius GPS jammer, that only affects your own vehicle. After all, you only need to disable the one receiver. GPS is a one-way communication.
  
  --
  -Billco, Fnarg.com
98. Re:at the risk of sounding stupid.. by billcopc · 2012-02-23 08:22 · Score: 1
  
  You think too much like a geek. In reality, the cheapest and most easily implemented trackers use GPS, because such a device is self-contained, will work in any vehicle and requires nothing more than a power source. Interfacing with the onboard computer, while somewhat easy, requires far more installation effort than a GPS receiver, and still does not address the issue of tracking where the vehicle actually is in the world.
  
  --
  -Billco, Fnarg.com
99. Re:at the risk of sounding stupid.. by billcopc · 2012-02-23 09:17 · Score: 1
  
  Oh boy... you's trollin'!
  I don't want cheaper insurance by being monitored. That's how any invasion of privacy begins: voluntarily. A few years later, it will become mandatory. Eventually, the government gets involved and makes it into law.
  Privacy isn't about having something to hide. It's about not letting your civil rights be stripped away in the name of profit and control.
  
  --
  -Billco, Fnarg.com
100. Re:at the risk of sounding stupid.. by triffid_98 · 2012-02-23 09:45 · Score: 1
  
  Because the only way the rental car knows it's speed is through GPS. It's not like there's a computer in there that can report back wheel speed via a standard computer interface in the passenger-side footwell.
  While ODBII does report current vehicle speed/rpm values I don't believe there's access to any historical data.
  
  That doesn't mean the data isn't there (it may or may not be, depending on the vehicle), just that you need expensive specialty tools in order to get at it.
101. Re:at the risk of sounding stupid.. by yurtinus · 2012-02-23 10:02 · Score: 2
  
  GPS only receives, doesn't transmit. You can detect the call out that a tracking device will make to send your location, but you can't detect a GPS device that is just receiving GPS signals.
  
  --
  +1 Disagree
102. Re:at the risk of sounding stupid.. by yurtinus · 2012-02-23 10:05 · Score: 1
  
  I prefer peeing on the power lines, myself.
  
  --
  +1 Disagree
103. Re:at the risk of sounding stupid.. by yurtinus · 2012-02-23 10:36 · Score: 1
  
  I think the point is to install a black box to collect the real-time data.
  
  --
  +1 Disagree
104. Re:at the risk of sounding stupid.. by TheCouchPotatoFamine · 2012-02-23 11:08 · Score: 1
  
  The most obvious is that you want to *ensure* you're not being tracked? Who *doesn't* want one of these, in this world?
  
  --
  CS majors know the time/space tradeoff, but they never get taught the 3rd, crucial, tradeoff of the set: comprehension!
105. Re:at the risk of sounding stupid.. by Anonymous Coward · 2012-02-23 12:18 · Score: 0
  
  Investigators who need information spoon-fed to them, troopers who need to be constantly reminded of the laws they are supposed to be upholding...it's pretty bad.
  In times past, there was no realistic way of providing this kind of support to officers. So they would end up relying much more on their own memories and judgment.
  While no doubt they would sometimes get it horribly wrong, over time that requirement would tend to select for officers who could show better memory and judgment. And recruitment screening and training would also reflect that requirement.
106. Re:at the risk of sounding stupid.. by Dan541 · 2012-02-23 15:02 · Score: 1
  
  Don't forget law enforcement who have been caught using GPS trackers without warrants in the past.
  
  --
  An SQL query goes to a bar, walks up to a table and asks, "Mind if I join you?"
107. Re:at the risk of sounding stupid.. by mjwx · 2012-02-23 15:02 · Score: 1
  
  Or have people not misusing company vehicles for private use.
  If a company is relying on GPS only to determine this, they deserve to be abused.
  
  This is more likely to be used to evade legal requirements, in Australia a trucking company has been caught disabling speed governors and faking log books.
  
  --
  Calling someone a "hater" only means you can not rationally rebut their argument.
108. Re:at the risk of sounding stupid.. by mjwx · 2012-02-23 15:12 · Score: 1
  
  I cannot speak for the UK, but in some parts of the world, you can get fined for speeding in a rental vehicle - by the rental company, not the police!
  I'm fairly certain this is illegal in the UK. It certainly is in Australia. The rental company, if fined can nominate you as the driver (seeing as they've got an invoice with your DL number against it, it's pretty solid evidence). The police will proceed to fine you.
  
  --
  Calling someone a "hater" only means you can not rationally rebut their argument.
109. Re:at the risk of sounding stupid.. by Dan541 · 2012-02-23 15:20 · Score: 1
  
  One of the reasons GPS is easy to jam is because of low signal power.
  I have a jammer that only blocks what's on my vehicle, but having a single transmitter to cover the whole vehicle means the strength of the signal varies greatly over different areas of the car. A good way to ensure it does not jam another vehicles GPS would be to replace the single jamming unit with multiple smaller units placed throughout the vehicle. As any tracking device will inevitably be closer to a jammer, the jammers can operate on even lower power and reduce its transmissions outside of the vehicle that its installed in..
  
  --
  An SQL query goes to a bar, walks up to a table and asks, "Mind if I join you?"
110. Re:at the risk of sounding stupid.. by plover · 2012-02-23 15:29 · Score: 1
  
  But using someone else's property against their wishes is criminality, though. Just because you agree with it doesn't instantly mean it's fine.
  There's a trucking practice called "bobtailing", which is when the driver disconnects the trailer at a dock or in a parking lot and drives just the tractor around town for personal use; to get lunch, find a motel, hit the bars, or whatever. Trucking companies often have some kind of policy banning or restricting bobtailing to just a few miles per stop, because trucks are pretty damn expensive to drive (fuel and insurance are not free.) With trackers in both the tractor and the trailer, a company can determine if a driver is bobtailing, and how much. Without a functioning tracking device, the trucking company doesn't really have a way to measure which miles were driven without the trailer.
  Is it criminal to bobtail? Only if they don't return the truck! Otherwise, it's just a contractual or employment dispute between the truck owner and the driver. The firm I'm familiar with will fire a driver for excessive bobtailing. But they sure can't send the driver to jail for it.
  
  --
  John
111. Re:at the risk of sounding stupid.. by Anonymous Coward · 2012-02-23 15:30 · Score: 0
  
  > extremely anti-insurance
  So if I lost an arm in an accident that was your fault, you've got Â£75k knocking about to pay my compensation ?
  Or less extreme, how about Â£15k if I just broke my arm when hitting your car on my bicycle ?
  It costs 15k to get your arm repaired?
112. Re:at the risk of sounding stupid.. by Uberbah · 2012-02-23 15:35 · Score: 1
  
  The LEOs of today, based off of what limited information I have gathered, pale somewhat in comparison with the LEOs of yesteryear.
  
  Stuff like the Rodney King beating happened all the time, it just wasn't caught on video. Two things HAVE made police relations worse, however:
  1. The War on Drugs
  2. The massive militarization of the police
  First it was SWAT teams and assault rifles. Then came the tanks and the CIA-NYPD alliances. Next up: unarmed drones...which will be armed sooner or later.
113. Re:at the risk of sounding stupid.. by crtreece · 2012-02-24 03:45 · Score: 1
  
  Maybe I should work up some schematic drawings and layouts
  I find your ideas interesting, and would like to subscribe to your newsletter.
  
  --
  file: .signature not found
Is it illegal yet? by djsmiley · 2012-02-22 20:16 · Score: 1

Don't GPS also have that nice sticker that says it must accept any interference blah blah blah.
Basically, is it illegal currently, because if it isn't, they aren't criminals :D

--
- http://www.milkme.co.uk
1. Re:Is it illegal yet? by phantomfive · 2012-02-22 20:20 · Score: 1
  
  In most countries in Europe and N America, jammers are illegal.
  
  They are also the most wonderful wireless device I've ever laid my hands on. I strongly suggest if you ever get a chance, to enjoy every minute of it.
  
  --
  "First they came for the slanderers and i said nothing."
2. Re:Is it illegal yet? by larppaxyz · 2012-02-22 20:20 · Score: 2
  
  I'm told that it's legal to own jamming device in UK, but using it is illegal.
3. Re:Is it illegal yet? by slimjim8094 · 2012-02-22 20:21 · Score: 4, Insightful
  
  I can't speak for the UK, but it is absolutely illegal in the US. I'd go as far as say it's one of the most illegal things you could do with radio, in that it's about the most egregious use of deliberate "harmful interference" around. It would be illegal if they were trying to block Joe Frank's Tree Service walkie-talkies, but GPS is very highly used, very highly depended on, and not only governmental but military. Anybody doing serious GPS jamming effective over a few miles would be found in an hour - probably less. Seriously, the military invented it to know where they were. Planes use it to land (not without fallbacks...). I wouldn't screw around with it if I were trying to stay quiet, because you'll get a lot of guys that are a lot smarter and a lot more serious than the local PD on your tail in a hurry.
  
  --
  I have developed a truly marvelous proof of this comment, which this signature is too narrow to contain.
4. Re:Is it illegal yet? by Anonymous Coward · 2012-02-23 01:45 · Score: 0
  
  All well and good, but the US military serves no purpose on the USA mainland. It's deployed overseas where the money-men want to obtain another country's resources without having to negotiate with the local government.
5. Re:Is it illegal yet? by interkin3tic · 2012-02-23 03:31 · Score: 1
  
  While true, I wouldn't expect that defense to hold up in secret military tribunal...
6. Re:Is it illegal yet? by PraiseBob · 2012-02-23 04:49 · Score: 1
  
  I wouldn't screw around with it if I were trying to stay quiet, because you'll get a lot of guys that are a lot smarter and a lot more serious than the local PD on your tail in a hurry.
  
  The article says that they've detected over 100 instances of GPS jamming. Yet they have only caught 1 person, a guy who wasn't charged with any crimes, and this is after 3 years of trying.
  
  Hard to say what US capabilities are in detecting jamming, but you can buy a jammer online for $100. They fall into the same category as radar dectectors which people use to avoid police tickets. Surely there must be thousands of jammers in active use. I'm guessing if you only used it for a short time, there is close to 0% chance of being caught.
7. Re:Is it illegal yet? by slimjim8094 · 2012-02-23 08:55 · Score: 1
  
  Sure, but try doing it on any larger scale. The pocket-sized device probably won't get you caught, sure, but anything that seriously disrupts the signal over a nontrivial area would get you noticed.
  
  --
  I have developed a truly marvelous proof of this comment, which this signature is too narrow to contain.
8. Re:Is it illegal yet? by plover · 2012-02-23 17:45 · Score: 1
  
  Sure, but try doing it on any larger scale. The pocket-sized device probably won't get you caught, sure, but anything that seriously disrupts the signal over a nontrivial area would get you noticed.
  The question comes up again: why? What would I need to jam on a large scale? Think of the (semi-)realistic scenarios where blocking GPS would benefit you.
  The first scenario is to avoid tracking. Because I would need to be off the grid for an extended period of time to negotiate my secret dealings, I would need a long-term jammer that wouldn't attract attention. I would only need to jam just the GPS receivers that would be giving away my position. Ditching all cell phones would be the primary step, of course. If I suspected a lojack type of tracker was present on my clothing or in my car, I'd need the jammer to block only a 5-10 meter radius about me, and no more. If I actually knew where the hostile receiver's antenna was, a very low power jamming transmitter clipped to it would disable the device and probably not radiate beyond the vehicle at all. But if I didn't know, or just suspected there might be one stuck under the frame of the car, it would have to be a larger radius jammer, just to be sure. Even then, a lesson from the cellular technologies would help. Three low power jammers (one behind the front bumper, one behind the rear bumper, and one in the cab) would probably be more effective than a single higher power jammer in the cab.
  If I were to go for the "Hollywood bank heist" kind of scenario that others have described above, such as blacking out a one kilometer radius to deny the police the ability to use GPS while my gang escapes via motorcycles hidden in a drainage pipe, sure a jammer that powerful would get noticed. But I wouldn't need it to work any longer than the amount of time required to execute the plan and get away. And if I were to get caught doing something that serious, jamming GPS would probably be among the lesser charges against me.
  There doesn't seem to be a middle scenario where I need high-powered GPS jamming to go undetected for a long term. At least nothing profitable springs to mind. Perhaps blackmailing a sleepy town's cell provider, or attacking a data center hosting a finance system. But feel free to come up with a good crime to fit! :-)
  
  --
  John
OT: What's with all the hyperbol summaries lately? by GodfatherofSoul · 2012-02-22 20:16 · Score: 1

You call the users of GPS jammers "criminals." While they might be, then so are people speeding. They could very well be people who hate being tracked by their government.

--
I swear to God...I swear to God! That is NOT how you treat your human!
Misleading Article by Anonymous Coward · 2012-02-22 20:21 · Score: 5, Interesting

It's not criminals blocking GPS it's blokes in trucks that don't want their bosses to know where they are and how fast they are going.
Most UK fleets operate GPS tracking so they can schedule deliveries/keep tabs on driver behaviour, jamming the GPS allows that truck driver to exceed the speed limits, take unscheduled breaks, drive for longer periods of time and generally do things without his bosses knowing about it. In cab tachographs can be tampered with, GPS tracking done remotely cannot so the solution for them is to block the GPs signal.
Yes it's illegal to interfere with GPS but we are not talking about hardened criminals here, what purpose would jamming a GPS network in a range of 200 yards around your vehicle serve ?
1. Re:Misleading Article by Spad · 2012-02-22 21:41 · Score: 1
  
  Yes it's illegal to interfere with GPS but we are not talking about hardened criminals here, what purpose would jamming a GPS network in a range of 200 yards around your vehicle serve ?
  Stealing and hiding a car with a GPS-based tracking device in it long enough for you to find and remove said device.
2. Re:Misleading Article by Dr_Barnowl · 2012-02-22 21:54 · Score: 5, Interesting
  
  what purpose would jamming a GPS network in a range of 200 yards around your vehicle serve
  Part of me thinks the enforcement of this is a prelude to the coming age where our vehicle positions are all tracked ; that isn't tinfoil hat territory, it's a serious proposition that has been raised by the government of the UK amongst others in Europe. I'm firmly convinced that this is one of the major justifications for the new Galileo navigation satellite constellation - it's been designed to work much better in the kind of convoluted urban environment common in European cities.
  The legislative justification is "road pricing" - the idea being ostensibly to reduce congestion on busy roads at rush hour by charging higher tolls for them, all enforced by an on-board GPS / Galileo datalogger with a cellular modem. Since a back-of-the-napkin calculation can tell you that it's an order of magnitude cheaper to toll roads by mandating active RFID tags in license plates, Occam's Razor says that road pricing is not the real aim of fitting every vehicle with a tracking device.
  Quite apart from the current reasons for enforcing a ban on GPS jammers (interference with airport GPS equipment, etc), they have a vested interest in not letting these devices become common enough to render them effectively impossible to police.
3. Re:Misleading Article by Anonymous Coward · 2012-02-22 22:18 · Score: 2, Insightful
  
  Usual solution to that is to drive it into a shipping container and strip the tracker out in that.
4. Re:Misleading Article by Anonymous Coward · 2012-02-22 23:16 · Score: 0
  
  actually they originally wanted rfid in plates but the roadside infrastructure was so expensive/intrusinve (remember european cites have narrower streets on average and move historic viewpoints than the US) so they decided GPS was a cheaper alternative
5. Re:Misleading Article by Kvan · 2012-02-23 01:42 · Score: 1
  
  I dunno, I think Hanlon's may be the more applicable razor here.
  
  --
  "A *person* is smart. People are dumb, panicky, dangerous animals and you know it."
  - 'K' in Men in Black.
6. Re:Misleading Article by GameboyRMH · 2012-02-23 01:56 · Score: 1
  
  Very likely. There's a lot of money and power to be had in putting trackers in everyone's cars. Road tax, toll roads, insurance, speed limits...all of these would become much more lucrative.
  
  --
  "When information is power, privacy is freedom" - Jah-Wren Ryel
7. Re:Misleading Article by Lehk228 · 2012-02-23 02:09 · Score: 1
  
  if it continues the next generation of vehicle GPS trackers will include s/n logging, a legitimate loss of signal would show signal strength going down, if instead noise goes way up your ass gets fired
  
  --
  Snowden and Manning are heroes.
8. Re:Misleading Article by Hatta · 2012-02-23 02:24 · Score: 1
  
  The legislative justification is "road pricing" - the idea being ostensibly to reduce congestion on busy roads at rush hour by charging higher tolls for them
  Oh, that will help keep the proles out of the city center during business hours.
  
  --
  Give me Classic Slashdot or give me death!
9. Re:Misleading Article by mindcandy · 2012-02-23 02:50 · Score: 1
  
  If it's your daily driver then you can just cover the antenna with copper foil (the kind used for roof flashing) before you drive off in the morning .. no need for an active jammer. In commercial vehicles the antenna isn't typically hidden at all.
  
  If you just want to disable your OnStar then all you need to is remove the appropriate fuse.
10. Re:Misleading Article by misexistentialist · 2012-02-23 03:48 · Score: 1
  
  Vehicle tracking is inevitable in the UK, but in a repressive state GPS jammers cannot be tolerated anyway because they are "anti-social". The UK already monitors whether you have a TV in your house and requires that women in advertisements aren't too attractive, so jammers clearly would have to be stopped by overwhelming force.
11. Re:Misleading Article by Anonymous Coward · 2012-02-23 09:14 · Score: 0
  
  Since a back-of-the-napkin calculation can tell you that it's an order of magnitude cheaper to toll roads by mandating active RFID tags in license plates, Occam's Razor says that road pricing is not the real aim of fitting every vehicle with a tracking device.
  Using the information already available would be even cheaper: the mileage is recorded every time your car is in the garage (to prevent mileage fraud) and the amount of petrol you use is recorded every time you fill the tank. If the EU decided to slightly increase the tax on petrol and give a slight incentive for the mileage, you would get penalized for standing still with the engine running and stimulated to drive efficiently, in all of the EU.
  The reason for not doing that is apparently that it will create petrol-tourism along the borders. But that can be reduced by input duty (and tax-free regulations for foreign tourists) along guarded borders. That's why the whole of the EU should unite: you are not allowed to check all goods travelling between two EU countries.
  The high-tech solutions do have the plus that a country can start using them individually, but then you still have the tourist problem: foreign cars do not have the equipment installed, so you either allow foreign cars to drive without paying or you have to charge them in another way (random police stops?)
  Solving a problem in the least information-leaking way is apparently not needed when you are The Government
Re:OT: What's with all the hyperbol summaries late by biodata · 2012-02-22 20:21 · Score: 2

or by corporations

--
Korma: Good
Re:OT: What's with all the hyperbol summaries late by zill · 2012-02-22 20:23 · Score: 1

tracked by their government.
This story is about the UK, where government GPS tracking has not been sanctioned yet AFAIK.
sounds like a nice business plan by A_French_Kiss · 2012-02-22 20:24 · Score: 1

They got 20 sensors for the price of 1.5 million pound?
Missing comment in article by Zoxed · 2012-02-22 20:25 · Score: 2

The obvious missing part of the article is that anyone who uses GPS as their sole method of navigation is an idiot (I hope that no ship would reply solely on GPS, as the article seems to imply they may.)
(Of course some people do reply to much on it: and end up driving down tail tracks and into rivers.)
1. Re:Missing comment in article by GameboyRMH · 2012-02-23 01:57 · Score: 1
  
  (I hope that no ship would reply solely on GPS, as the article seems to imply they may.)
  Set sail for fail:
  http://spectrum.ieee.org/computing/software/automated-to-death/3
  
  --
  "When information is power, privacy is freedom" - Jah-Wren Ryel
2. Re:Missing comment in article by Anonymous Coward · 2012-02-23 02:12 · Score: 0
  
  Ships do not rely only on GPS. In fact to get a license to navigate a ship you have to learn celestial navigation, among other things. Ships are also required to have an assortment of other navigation systems which are checked against one another.
3. Re:Missing comment in article by plover · 2012-02-23 17:58 · Score: 1
  
  Ships do not rely only on GPS. In fact to get a license to navigate a ship you have to learn celestial navigation, among other things. Ships are also required to have an assortment of other navigation systems which are checked against one another.
  You mean they rely on backup systems like LORAN-C? Just checking.
  Yes, airplanes still have VOR beacons available, and they're still used for IFR flying in older aircraft. But ships, no, their backup is a compass, a clock, and a sextant, and possibly one or two old guys who can read the damn thing. And apparently even they are busy clumsily "falling into life rafts" when they should be captaining their ships.
  
  --
  John
Re:OT: What's with all the hyperbol summaries late by Grishnakh · 2012-02-22 20:26 · Score: 1

Jamming GPS isn't going to prevent you from being tracked by the government, unless you're so paranoid you believe the government has a GPS tracking device on your car.
Re:OT: What's with all the hyperbol summaries late by Anonymous Coward · 2012-02-22 20:27 · Score: 0

What are you getting at exactly? Jamming GPS signals is illegal. A criminal is somebody who engages in illegal activities, so it follows that "users" of jamming systems are criminals.
I've probably had this happen to me. by Anonymous Coward · 2012-02-22 20:32 · Score: 0

While I was in vacation in Bulgaria a couple of years ago I was astounded to see that my GPS unit claimed that I was moving at 200 km/h while we were basically at rest on a tourist boat on the sea. This condition persisted, on and off, for several minutes. I've never had this kind of thing happen with this GPS receiver (a Garmin eTrex Venture) either before or after. My guess is that a GPS spoofer of some kind was involved, but I have no way of proving this...
1. Re:I've probably had this happen to me. by ledow · 2012-02-23 03:30 · Score: 1
  
  Almost certainly not.
  It probably just got a crap signal and kept trying to update your location on the basis of that crap signal. Thus one minute there's a jump of 200km/h and the next there's nothing because it thought you hadn't moved.
  And it would be even worse if that were a commercial road-based sat-nav device - those basically try to snap you to the nearest road, which can mean all sorts of funny business when you have a poor signal or aren't on an actual road.
  GPS "spoofers" don't try to make nearby GPS devices more at 200km/h (which would instantly signal a warning on anything checking speed). They just block the signal (by talking over it) so the GPS has no idea where it is at all and can't even guess. A bit like going through a tunnel with a satnav.
2. Re:I've probably had this happen to me. by CompMD · 2012-02-23 10:45 · Score: 1
  
  You got a bogus signal and it got confused. Restarting the unit probably fixed it I'm guessing. Drive around a large parking garage with open sides some time, you may find interesting things happen.
Re:OT: What's with all the hyperbol summaries late by slimjim8094 · 2012-02-22 20:33 · Score: 5, Insightful

Paranoid much?
In any case, the entire reason we have the FCC is precisely because you don't get to decide how other people use radio. You're not allowed to jam GPS because you don't like it. That would be like shooting down a plane because it flew over your house.
Sure, if you wanted to jam GPS for a 20 foot radius, people probably won't notice. But GPS is a global system of great importance - planes can use it to navigate, not to mention millions of people just trying to make it to their relatives' houses, or find the nearest pizza place. Not to mention, it's military. They'd have something to say about your "I'll block GPS!" plan, I'm sure.
But let's accept the premise. Let's say for the benefit of the doubt that you didn't know the sorts of things GPS is actually used for. Can I jam the police frequency so they can't operate near my house? "Fuck da police" doesn't count. How about the fire department? ATC communications? Hospital pagers? WiFi? The local radio station while it's airing Rush Limbaugh, because I don't like him?
Most radio is licensed, including GPS. You have to abide by rules to use a licensed service, but it grants you protection from interference. You as an individual don't get to decide that this particular licensed service can just be interfered with because it pisses you off.

--
I have developed a truly marvelous proof of this comment, which this signature is too narrow to contain.
Trucker disrupts air control tower by abelb · 2012-02-22 20:42 · Score: 5, Interesting

As mentioned above truckers, delivery van drivers etc can use jammers to hide thier location inadvertantly disrupting critical systems.
"An event last year at Newark Liberty International Airport in New Jersey showed that it only takes one jammer to cause disruption. Airport controllers had installed a new GPS-based landing system, so that aircraft could approach in bad visibility. But it was shutting itself down once or twice a day. It took several months to find the culprit: a driver on the nearby New Jersey Turnpike using a portable GPS jammer to avoid paying the highway toll."
1. Re:Trucker disrupts air control tower by Anonymous Coward · 2012-02-23 00:12 · Score: 0
  
  Then you have a poorly designed, poorly executed GPS based landing system. However, I'm sure it met its most critical goal--that of being immensely profitable to a contractor somewhere.
  In keeping with the 'don't put all your eggs in one basket' theory, the FAA is just salivating at the thought of turning off ground-based navigation and landing aids. I always wonder--in a (contrived) 'national emergency' it would be pretty easy to shut down the GPS system and there isn't a lot anybody could do about it even with overwhelming numbers. It wouldn't be so easy to shut down ALL of the ground-based navaids and keep them off in the face of citizens who didn't want it that way. Remote control systems to devices in remote areas can always be disabled, for instance.
  The chief problem with such things is coverage: we never really built enough of them in the first place, and they do have operating quirks that require training and experience to deal with. Of course, people knowledgeable in how things work are just poison to police states.
  We still have a good number of people who know how to maintain ground based systems, but of course building one's own network of GPS satellites is problematic to say the least.
  Time to go get the tinfoil hat, I suppose...
2. Re:Trucker disrupts air control tower by stiggle · 2012-02-23 00:42 · Score: 2
  
  This is why other spacefaring powers are creating their own versions of GPS - eg. Europeans with Galileo. So if the US DoD does turn off/encrypt the NavStar constellation they can still access their own systems, and others are enhancing LORAN-C
Obligatory Monty Python reference by starfishsystems · 2012-02-22 20:59 · Score: 1

Cue the cat detector van!

--
Parity: What to do when the weekend comes.
1. Re:Obligatory Monty Python reference by Anonymous Coward · 2012-02-22 21:59 · Score: 0
  
  aww bless. How's ol' Eric these days?
Re:OT: What's with all the hyperbol summaries late by digitig · 2012-02-22 21:05 · Score: 3, Insightful

Paranoid much?
In any case, the entire reason we have the FCC is precisely because you don't get to decide how other people use radio.
The FCC has less power in the UK than you seem to think.

You're not allowed to jam GPS because you don't like it.
Did you notice that the summary referred to illegal GPS jamming?

Not to mention, it's military.
But not UK military. I doubt the DoD will be interested unless they're planning to invade the UK.

Most radio is licensed, including GPS.
That's arguable, actually. And because it's such low power, harmonics and spurious emissions from high powered transmitters that are entirely within legal limits can jam GPS -- there have been problems reported from TV transmitters, for instance.

--
Quidnam Latine loqui modo coepi?
GLONASS by Dynamoo · 2012-02-22 21:17 · Score: 2

The Russian GLONASS system uses a different frequency from GPS (around 1.602 GHz for GLONASS, 1.57542 and 1.2276 GHz for GPS). It might be that GLONASS signals would be unaffected by a GPS jammer, although I can't imaging that it would be much of a stretch to make a GPS jammer work for GLONASS as well. The forthcoming European Galileo system uses different frequencies again.
GLONASS is interesting because harware support for GLONASS positioning has been in some smartphones since 2011, and it will become very mainstream this year. I would also expect to see personal navigation tools supporting GLONASS as well as GPS this year. More satellites means a better fix, and it isn't very expensive to do.
So, in the future your vehicle tracking might use a combination of GLONASS, Galileo and GPS using a much broader frequency range than just GPS alone.

--
Never email donotemail@WeAreSpammers.com
1. Re:GLONASS by MartinSchou · 2012-02-23 00:55 · Score: 4, Informative
  
  GLONASS is different from GPS in more than just frequency - each satellite has its own specific frequency.
  One of the advantages to this over GPS is that atmospheric disturbances are much easier to cancel out. Might make it harder to jam as well, as you'd need a broader spectrum, but I don't know.
  One disadvantage is, of course, that your receivers have to be able to pick up multiple frequencies.
2. Re:GLONASS by sciencewhiz · 2012-02-23 20:25 · Score: 1
  
  The new GLONASS signal is CDMA, so FDMA will slowly be phased out.
Re:OT: What's with all the hyperbol summaries late by Anonymous Coward · 2012-02-22 21:21 · Score: 1

How about an ex or some other person who might spy on you?
odd approach. by Anonymous Coward · 2012-02-22 21:53 · Score: 0

Surely if they want to stop this kind of thing.. they could start with stopping people from selling them.
http://www.jammer4u.co.uk/car-gps-jammer-c-1.html
1. Re:odd approach. by biodata · 2012-02-23 01:26 · Score: 1
  
  The problem is that it is easy to imagine a general purpose radio transmitter with configurable output frequency that could be tuned to broadcast whatever signal is required, within a given range. You can't really legislate against people building this sort of thing, because intent is all.
  
  --
  Korma: Good
Re:OT: What's with all the hyperbol summaries late by Anonymous Coward · 2012-02-22 21:58 · Score: 0

or by corporations
To be more specific: journos?
Re:OT: What's with all the hyperbol summaries late by Feefers · 2012-02-22 21:59 · Score: 4, Insightful

Besides we don't need GPS, we can use the vast CCTV network to track you far better.
No Jammers ... by garry_g · 2012-02-22 22:08 · Score: 1

... just LightSquared doing 4G tests ... and of course it's all the manufacturers' fault ...
US Secret Service by Anonymous Coward · 2012-02-22 22:24 · Score: 0

The US secret service routinely blocks cell phones (complete block) and consumer gps devices (accuracy decreased greatly) while protecting the beast ( http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Presidential_state_car_(United_States) ) and its occupant. They are now also using them for candidates as well.
Complete reliance on GPS is wrong by Viol8 · 2012-02-22 22:32 · Score: 3, Insightful

FTA: "Our modern society is almost completely reliant on GPS," Humphreys told the conference. "It could be deadly."
Well sorry I'm but it shouldn't be. Any critical systems should have backup systems such as using cellphone towers to triangulate or LORAN or even just plain old maps. Any society which puts all its eggs into a basket that can easily be knocked over is just asking for trouble.
1. Re:Complete reliance on GPS is wrong by Ihmhi · 2012-02-23 02:53 · Score: 1
  
  Very few people today have this sort of mindset. I recall reading about how GPS had become so reliable and they were looking to disable the precursor system used for naval navigation. What if the GPS unit craps out? What about the satellite? Or weather interference?
  (Ah, you know what, that was LORAN actually. I knew the name in your post looked familiar. d: )
  
  --
  Random Thoughts From A Diseased Mind (Not For Dummies)
2. Re:Complete reliance on GPS is wrong by IndustrialComplex · 2012-02-23 03:52 · Score: 1
  
  It's not asking for trouble, it's just a fact of nature that if you introduce any variance into the system you will necessarily alter the performance of the system.
  A critical system utilizes technology Y and has an error rate of 1% It has a backup to technology Y, but when utilizing that backup it has an error rate of 2%. You are 'reliant' on technology Y in order to achieve an error rate of 1%, not that you are reliant on technology Y to perform at all.
  Think about a hospital. They have emergency backup generators. All the patients won't immediately drop dead if the hospital loses grid power, but you should expect that their service would be degraded until grid power is back up. That's what they mean by reliant on GPS. We are reliant on it in order to achieve our current performance.
  In real terms, an ambulance responding to an emergency is likely going to use GPS, but they also have a map in the glove box (and a driver who knows the roads). A loss of GPS will result in increased response time. Reliant on GPS to achieve their current performance.
  
  --
  Out of modpoints but really liked a post? 1BDkF6TtmmeZ3yqXbz9yhdYVqRYnwFoXDj
3. Re:Complete reliance on GPS is wrong by Anonymous Coward · 2012-02-24 19:00 · Score: 0
  
  FTA: "Our modern society is almost completely reliant on GPS," Humphreys told the conference. "It could be deadly."
  Well sorry I'm but it shouldn't be. Any critical systems should have backup systems such as using cellphone towers to triangulate or LORAN or even just plain old maps. Any society which puts all its eggs into a basket that can easily be knocked over is just asking for trouble.
  Cellphone towers rely on GPS for timing. LORAN-C is being replaced by eLORAN, which relies on GPS for timing, though it can free run for a while without signal.
  GPS is a far more fundamental component to our society than most people realise. There is a reason that Russia, Europe, China, Japan and India are all running or launching their own systems.
Lower bus fare by Anonymous Coward · 2012-02-22 22:36 · Score: 0

In the Netherlands, the bus fare is calculated by the distance travelled. If you yam the GPS signal on the bus you'll only have to pay the EUR 0.79 base rate, no mather how long your yourney is.
And another great advantage: The government can't track your location when you use public transportation.
Slight disadvantage: The bus driver might get lost.
oh look, it's the hypocritical money-wasting gov by Anonymous Coward · 2012-02-22 22:54 · Score: 1

(1) "The Sentinel Project" will have been the result of some bureaucrat with government money to "allocate" having an interest in Chronos Technology;
(2) The Soviets were estimated to spend about $500 million (adjusted) annually on HF jamming. The UK jams HF by allowing the ex-nationalised main communications provider to sell powerline Ethernet devices which turn mains wiring into an antenna and plough noise into the spectrum. As far as I'm concerned, while the government jams the people's services, it's fair game for the people to jam the government's;
(3) Any critical system which relies on a GPS signal is dangerously flawed. No matter how much you outlaw them, another GPS jammer is one amateur radio enthusiast away from being built;
(4) A tenner says that some form of obligatory GPS tracking for cars will be introduced in the near future. Installing journey recording black boxes is already prerequisite for many car insurance vendors.
Secret? by Anonymous Coward · 2012-02-22 23:03 · Score: 0

So the Secret Network* is errr ever so slightly less secret now? Unless this is a cunning double bluff of course. *Scare caps, patent pending.
Re:Obligatory response is obligatory. by TaoPhoenix · 2012-02-22 23:36 · Score: 1

I can't believe this one hasn't showed up this far down either.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oFRbZJXjWIA

--
My first Journal Entry ever, in 8 years! http://slashdot.org/journal/365947/aphelion-scifi-fantasy-horror-poetry-webzine
Time Well Spent by Anonymous Coward · 2012-02-22 23:53 · Score: 2, Informative

Here's a more in-depth article on this: http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/technology-17119768
Where the project leader said "We believe there's between 50 and 450 occurrences in the UK every day".
This might sound bad as that's thousands in a week! So how come our Satnavs still work?
That's because it means that by their estimates, there are only at most 450 people in the whole country using the jammers; and seeing as most people make a journey, then make a return journey later, that figure may be half that.
So is this really as bad as they make out?
"In one location the Sentinel study recorded more than 60 GPS jamming incidents in six months."
That's only 10 a month in a blackspot, and as that's only twice a week - it means there's probably only one person on that stretch of road using a jammer.
The article also says "the project received £1.5m funding", and has so far only caught one person.
Nice to know the money's being put to good use.
Re:OT: What's with all the hyperbol summaries late by Anonymous Coward · 2012-02-23 00:13 · Score: 0

Anti GPS jamming laws have exclusionary clauses for people wanting to avoid governmental tracking? Of course not - people are criminals because the law says so. Doesn't make it just, and certainly does not support the claim to hyperbole.
Re:OT: What's with all the hyperbol summaries late by biodata · 2012-02-23 01:20 · Score: 1

Jamming GPS is not like shooting down a plane. Planes have people on board (usually) and financial value which is destroyed in the crash. The GPS is a military installation that beams radio waves from space, so jamming it does not damage it, not kill any pilots or passengers.

--
Korma: Good
In the UK too by Curunir_wolf · 2012-02-23 01:28 · Score: 1

Damn you, LightSquared!

--
"Somebody has to do something. It's just incredibly pathetic it has to be us."
--- Jerry Garcia
Re:OT: What's with all the hyperbol summaries late by GameboyRMH · 2012-02-23 01:52 · Score: 1

I think he was referring to OnStar and insurance companies (insurance trackers are optional right now, but might be "optional" in the future.)

--
"When information is power, privacy is freedom" - Jah-Wren Ryel
Summary and TFA need to clarify. by g0bshiTe · 2012-02-23 01:55 · Score: 1

The project, run by GPS-tracking company Chronos Technology, picked up the illegal jamming incidents via four GPS sensors in trials lasting from two to six months per location.'"
So there is actually a law on the books in the UK stating it is illegal to jam a GPS sensor or only illegal to jam one you don't own? Please be specific, TFA mentioned blocking corporate vehicle tracking, and theft of high value vehicles. Is there that much problem with high value vehicle theft in the UK? How bout some numbers to back up that claim. More likely I'd choose evasion of vehicle tracking, spousal evasion of phone GPS tracking and people who regularly break posted speed limits worried their GPS data will earn them a citation.

--
I am Bennett Haselton! I am Bennett Haselton!
1. Re:Summary and TFA need to clarify. by Anonymous Coward · 2012-02-23 02:21 · Score: 0
  
  its actually illegal under the "wireless telegraphy act"
  to operate an "unlicensed transmitter", which is what a jammer is (not that you can get a license for a wideband noise transmitter)
  its the same law they use for busting pirate radio stations
  you can buy any transmitting equipment you like licensed or not, the law is only broken when you turn it on.
Re:OT: What's with all the hyperbol summaries late by eladts · 2012-02-23 02:09 · Score: 1

While jamming GPS does net cause directly to loss of life or property damage, it might do so indirectly by disrupting systems relying on GPS.
JLOC is the U.S. equivalent. by Anonymous Coward · 2012-02-23 02:30 · Score: 0

Thought this was interesting;
http://www.jointnavigation.org/abstract.cfm?meetingID=29&pid=52
I guess some company named NAVSYS built a GPS jamming detection system and sold it to the NGA for use in America.
GPS jamming can affect aircraft, corporate vehicle tracking, civilian guidance systems and all sorts of other GPS-reliant tech. I think it's good we have tools like this. Granted, the SIGINT folks can probably track our every move but people don't seem to be in much of an uproar over stuff like CARNIVORE or DCS-3000 which are arguably more invasive programs.
Re:OT: What's with all the hyperbol summaries late by ArsenneLupin · 2012-02-23 02:36 · Score: 1

That would be like shooting down a plane because it flew over your house.
Like these guys. And it wasn't even yet over their "house"...
But they used bird-shot, so maybe this somehow makes it ok...
Re: Firing Their Asses by Cid+Highwind · 2012-02-23 02:37 · Score: 1

Expedited Delivery LLC Quarterly Report, 1Q2014
...since the introduction of next-generation GPS trackers across our delivery van fleet, and subsequent dismissal of 92% of our driving staff for unauthorized GPS tampering, our labour expenditures have been reduced sharply. However, the savings are tempered by the loss of several valuable revenue streams. Due to the three remaining drivers refusing to drive within 5km of a RADAR installation or radio tower or 2km of high-voltage power lines, we have had to give up our contracts with several air freight carriers, and scale back our guaranteed same-day delivery radius considerably...

--
0 1 - just my two bits
Rebooting a car by P-niiice · 2012-02-23 02:45 · Score: 1

Heh, cleaning the car will soon involve clearing cookies by means other than a hand vac.
GPS and war by Anonymous Coward · 2012-02-23 02:45 · Score: 0

Apparently US power stations use GPS as the reference time signal to ensure that the different power stations keep their generators in phase
TFA mentions financial transactions too. There are countless things that are starting to rely on GPS because it's easy. The problem is that GPS is becoming a major vulnerability because of this trend. In the old days counties got "into the club" by developing and demonstrating nuclear weapons. War is a last resort, but showing your ability to nuke someone if all else fails makes countries pay attention to you. There are other ways to demonstrate ones ability to cripple an nation now - witness the Chinese anti-satellite laser demonstration. Yes, they already have nuclear, but that's so unpopular these days. Most people didn't really understand the message of the laser test, but you can bet folks who worry about national security took note. GPS should not be a necessary component for anything, but only used as an aid.
Re:OT: What's with all the hyperbol summaries late by Ihmhi · 2012-02-23 02:50 · Score: 1

I wonder, could you place a frame of infrared lights around a license plate? It'd just look like glass beads or some other sort of decoration to the naked eye but would probably blind out cameras trying to get a read on the plate. It'd be about as close to cloak as we can expect to get cheaply.

--
Random Thoughts From A Diseased Mind (Not For Dummies)
Re:OT: What's with all the hyperbol summaries late by biodata · 2012-02-23 03:51 · Score: 1

'might indirectly cause damage' is different from 'kills people and writes off million dollar plane'

--
Korma: Good
Re:OT: What's with all the hyperbol summaries late by Adam+Appel · 2012-02-23 04:08 · Score: 1

ENHANCE!

--
They come in the dark, only in the darkest.
lightsquared??? by chair300 · 2012-02-23 04:38 · Score: 1

I guess lightsquared didn't get their way in the US so they are moving shop to the UK, good luck UK
HoMeBoy Nyte Sytes Re:at the risk of sounding stup by Fubari · 2012-02-23 05:59 · Score: 1

If you liked that, you'll like this: HoMeBoy Nyte Sytes

The mistake you make is thinking that such an intelligent idea would be used by a group of people who think that holding a handgun sideways is a good thing.
Not exactly true! by wfstanle · 2012-02-23 06:53 · Score: 1

I read about it in a BBC article. They said that they caught one person who was a trucker. Probably the trucker was not just a curious kid. It still begs the question... Why? What purpose does it serve?
1. Re:Not exactly true! by BitterOak · 2012-02-23 08:13 · Score: 2
  
  I read about it in a BBC article. They said that they caught one person who was a trucker. Probably the trucker was not just a curious kid. It still begs the question... Why? What purpose does it serve?
  It says in the article that people use the jammers to thwart GPS tracking devices installed in the vehicle. These tracking devices are used in commercial vehicles to enforce company policy with regard to vehicle usage, as well as by law enforcement to track criminal suspects.
  
  --
  If I can be modded down for being a troll, can I be modded up for being an orc, or a balrog?
2. Re:Not exactly true! by LoRdTAW · 2012-02-23 09:21 · Score: 1
  
  If it was a Trucker I highly doubt it was a "curious" kid. Rather a Trucker who is looking to cheat his/her companies GPS tracking system. Google Qualcomm, a very popular system used in North America. If you ever see a semi with a white roundish antenna (best described as two salad bowls stuck together) its a Qualcomm. It also acts as a Tachograph, a device that records the number of hours a driver has logged on the road. This is to enforce "Hours of Service" rules to prevent truckers from driving long stints and becoming exhausted behind the wheel (a major cause of accidents are sleepy truckers nodding off behind the wheel). Trucks without tachographs must have log books to indicate hours and drivers regularly fudge them to get more hours on the road and less at rest (a resting truck doesn't make money). It also offers two way communication and email for drivers to communicate with the dispatcher. In Europe just about every semi truck has a tachograph. I don't think the tachograph is GPS equipped but I am sure there are versions that might have it or have GPS tracking added by the company.
  Bottom line, the trucker just wanted to rid himself/herself of the big brother tracking system installed in the truck. Some companies become fuel misers and every extra km or mile traveled has to be answered for by the driver. Maybe they just wanted to take a more scenic route, stop off at a favorite eating spot or just go their own damn route. That or they were trying to cheat the HOS rules, which wouldn't surprise me if that was the primary use of GPS jamming in trucks.
3. Re:Not exactly true! by plover · 2012-02-23 15:07 · Score: 2
  
  Trucks have extra rules passenger cars don't have. One is that they must follow truck routes, so they aren't dragging giant trailers through clogged intersections causing more gridlock, hauling heavy loads over restricted bridges, or blocking narrow streets, causing safety issues or other traffic problems. A GPS tracker will record every road the trucker drives, and report on any violations.
  When a shortcut over a narrow bridge through a residential area might save you 30 minutes, and the tracker is the only thing keeping you from taking that shortcut and delivering your load on time, well, it's hardly your fault if the bloody thing stops working, right?
  
  --
  John
4. Re:Not exactly true! by Anonymous Coward · 2012-02-24 04:39 · Score: 0
  
  It is if you are using a GPS lammer and are caught!
How do they know it was intentional. by PuckSR · 2012-02-23 10:18 · Score: 1

I own a cheap FM transmitter from China. It creates significant interference with GPS.
Considering that GPS is such a weak signal, it isn't surprising that accidental interference occurs. How are the sure that these were not cases of accidental jamming?
1. Re:How do they know it was intentional. by plover · 2012-02-23 18:15 · Score: 1
  
  Because the photos in TFA are similar to the photos of the GPS jammers sold on DealExtreme's web site?
  
  --
  John
Re:OT: What's with all the hyperbol summaries late by zippthorne · 2012-02-23 12:46 · Score: 1

We in the US have the FCC. You guys in UK have an analogous agency. You must, to satisfy the international telecommunications treaties...

--
Can you be Even More Awesome?!
Re:OT: What's with all the hyperbol summaries late by Dan541 · 2012-02-23 15:25 · Score: 1

Not fortunately not any random citizen can access that. With GPS tracking now your neighbour can know where you're driving to.

--
An SQL query goes to a bar, walks up to a table and asks, "Mind if I join you?"
Re:OT: What's with all the hyperbol summaries late by digitig · 2012-02-23 22:26 · Score: 1

Ofcom. But although they regulate, they tend to leave spectrum enforcement to whoever is suffering as a result of the interference (basically, if you want to stop the interference then you find out who is doing it and take them to court), except in the most severe and persistent cases.

--
Quidnam Latine loqui modo coepi?
For all us non-Brits by storkus · 2012-02-24 00:50 · Score: 1

Being a ham radio op as well as somewhat obsessed about this very subject (over-reliance on GPS), I decided to look up some stuff and see what I could find:
1. The UK's version of the FCC is Ofcom: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ofcom
2a. Here in the USA jamming is strictly verbotten by non-military under ANY circumstances: I don't even think the civie police get to use it, though I'm not 100% sure there. This is also why cell/mobile phone jamming in movie theaters and similar places that is done in some other countries is not done here.
2b. Googling "ofcom jamming laws" yields this: http://stakeholders.ofcom.org.uk/enforcement/spectrum-enforcement/jammers
In short, jamming carries "a maximum penalty of two years imprisonment and/or an unlimited fine." Note that while this section specifically talks about phones, the way it's written it's probably applicable to everything, just like elsewhere.
3. While GPS is indeed a US-DoD system, the UK and US have been real tight for a long time, so I'm sure any problems in GPS will be dealt with pretty harshly. The fact that they're putting these remote radios up all over the place must mean they're having a serious problem with the jamming as I haven't heard of any problems like this elsewhere. (Though I'm guilty of getting a disproportionate amount of my news from /., so...)
4. Outside of the jamming, GPS alternatives are Glonass (currently being rebuilt), Galileo, Baidou, and other upcoming systems (none of which are operational yet AFAIK)--all of which are satellite-based and thus vulnerable to anything that could affect things in space--and the leftovers of LORAN-C in western Europe, the Soviet equivalent Chayka, and the Soviet Omega system equivalent, Alpha--all of which are terrestrial. None of these systems are in operation anymore in N. America, so we're "playing without a net" as it were, which worries me to no end. (Yes, there are the various ILS's for planes, but what about everyone else?)